Eagle

Home

News
Behind the Headlines
Two-Cents Worth
Video of the Week
News Blurbs

Short Takes

Plain Talk

The Ryter Report

DONATIONS

Articles
Testimony
Bible Questions

Internet Articles (2012)
Internet Articles (2011)
Internet Articles (2010)
Internet Articles (2009)
Internet Articles (2008)
Internet Articles (2007)
Internet Articles (2006)
Internet Articles (2005)
Internet Articles (2004)

Internet Articles (2003)
Internet Articles (2002)
Internet Articles (2001)

From The Mailbag

Books
Order Books

Cyrus
Rednecker

Search

About
Comments

Links

Openings at $75K to $500K+

Pinnaclemicro 3 Million Computer Products

Startlogic Windows Hosting

Adobe  Design Premium CS5

Get Your FREE Coffeemaker Today!

Corel Store

 

Obama plays Roosevelt: insists he
inherited what will be a crushing,
unsustainable deficit from Bush.
The Washington Post, the leftwing voice of the nation's capital, speaking as half of the bobble-head Siamese twins doll that champions everything-Obama, gave credence to Barack Obama's constant harangue that he inherited a $1.3 trillion debt from the Bush-43 Administration. The only president in modern history that could actually truthfully make that claim was President Ronald Reagan who inherited a prime interest rate of 21.5% from outgoing President Jimmy Carter—and an economy that was far worse than that which greeted FDR on March 6, 1933. In fact, when New York Gov. Franklin D. Roosevelt was inaugurated as the nation's 32nd president, he created the public relations strategy of blaming his predecessor for his own economic screw-ups. And Roosevelt, with the help of the liberal press, got away with it for 11-plus years, blaming the depression he created from the Recession of 1930 on former president Herbert Hoover—and taking credit for the creation of the banking failsafe systems that were put into place during his first term that were actually the brainchild of Hoover, who could not get them through the Democratically-controlled Congress in 1930. Even though history supports the view that the United States, like most of Europe, was coming out of the Recession of 1930 by the Election of 1932, Hoover had already become spoiled goods and it was easy for Roosevelt and Company (the leftwing media) to tar and feather him. The left was so sure that Roosevelt, who was bankrolled by the same bankers who caused the Stock Market Crash of 1929, was going to prevail on Nov. 7, 1932 that they were already taking their marching orders from him by late summer, 1932. The orders? Don't give Hoover an inch. What we need is a crisis, and more of it. Sound familiar?

When Obama spoke at a retreat of congressional Republicans in Baltimore on Jan. 29, 2010, Congressman Jeb Hensarling [R-TX] asked Obama if his "...new budget, like your old budget, triple the national debt and continue to take us down the path of increasing the cost of government to almost 25% of our economy?"

Obama shot back, saying "...when we came into office, the deficit was $1.3 trillion. So when you say that suddenly I've got a monthly deficit that's higher than the annual deficit left by Republicans, that's factually just not true, and you know it's not true. And what is true is that we came in already with a $1.3 trillion deficit before I passed any law. What is true is that we came in with $8 trillion worth of debt over the next decade." The rhetoric has not let up because Obama knows if you repeat a lie enough times people believe the lie and deny the reality of the truth. Particularly when the people's watchdog, the free press, does not speak up and call the liar to task for his lies.

Obama, who uses history as a playbook (since history verifies how the public will likely respond to the ploys of their national leaders), was called out on the practice by his media ally, the Washington Post, on June 12 in an article by Ben Pershing. Pershing aptly quoted a remark by New York Times reporter Peter Baker from a June 11 article (the other half of the bobble-head Siamese Twins doll). Baker noted that blaming the guy who came before doesn't work for long., noting that "...Obama wastes few opportunities to remind the country that the problems are not of his making...But at a certain point, a new president assumes ownership of the problems and finds himself answering for his own actions. For Mr. Obama...some advisors say that moment may be coming soon."

The question is: how did Obama manage to convince so many people that the generational debt this nation owes was Bush's making? Before we commence to the finger-pointing, let's make one thing clear from the gitgo. Debt is not created by the White House. Debt in created by Congress. Constitutionally, it's created by the House of Representatives. Constitutionally, all spending bills must originate in the House. The Senate may concur on them, but the House is responsible for spending...and the debt your children, grandchildren and great grandchildren get saddled with are gifts from the House of Representatives. So, regardless what spending bills the guy in the Oval Office wants is just that—a Christmas wish list—until the House of Representatives fills his stocking. Ultimately, the Constitution makes them responsible for the debt by giving them two year terms of office so the voters can fire them if they don't like the debt they are burdened with. And, the voters can demand that the new Congress repeal those spending measures—and fire them if they don't. Furthermore, if a politician campaigns on a promise to repeal spending laws and fails to keep his word, the politician can be recalled and removed from office. The American people need to understand their rights under the covenant called the Constitution of the United States.

When you look at "Bush-43 debt" you have to stop at 2007, because his Party—the GOP—lost the House and Senate in the midterm Election of 2006. In Jan. 2007, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi began to control the purse strings of America. In 2007, Bush-43 got so tough on spending, that when the House was putting together the omnibus appropriations bill of 2008, Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid simply sat on it until 2009 because Bush-43 would have vetoed it. Instead, Congress bypassed Bush-43 and enacted continuing resolutions to keep the government running until they got a more spending-friendly guy in the White House. When Obama took office, Congress quickly passed a massive, pork laden spending bill to fund the government for 2009—without a single Republican vote. (By the way, a lot of pork—including a $4 billion gratuity under the Community Development Block Grant for ACORN—was stuck in that bill.)

Now, keeping in mind that Congress, not the White House, creates debt, let's take off the rose-colored glasses and look at the rising debt through a prism of honesty. On Jan. 7, 2009 (two weeks before Obama took office) the Congressional Budget Office projected the deficit for fiscal year 2009 at $1.2 trillion. (Note: this cannot be called Bush's debt since Congress refused to submit a budget for f2009, and used continuing resolutions to bypass the White House. Thus, the deficit spending for f2009 must lay at the feet of the Democratic majority in Congress who used continuing resolutions and not a law signed by Bush-43 to keep the spending alive in 2009.) Obama didn't think about that when he called it a Bush-43 $1.3 trillion deficit.)

Since that deficit was actually created by Congress and not the White House, we need to blame the House and Senate for the sleight-of-hand that created the spending. As I recall, Senator Barack Hussein Obama [D-IL] was one of those who voted to bypass Bush-43. So, I guess, it's rightly his deficit after all.

The Congressional Budget Office also reported the 10-year debt projection at $3.1 trillion. Obama said the projection was $8 trillion. He lied. He knew the programs he had initiated would push the debt throttle over $8 trillion, and he was covering his butt by anchoring down a "media figure" that would make it appear that the $8 trillion in long-term debt foreshadowed his Administration.

The Democrats own the deficits that began to accrue in 2007 since they owned Congress from that time. The Bush-43 deficits are those which accrued from 2001 to Jan., 2007 because that is the period of time his party ruled Congress and controlled the creation and flow of debt. Thus, Bush created a $400 billion deficit by the end of 2004, but began cutting back in 2005. In 2007, his deficit was only about $200 billion. The $450 billion deficit in 2008 belongs to Nancy Pelosi. The $1.85 trillion debt in 2009 rightly belongs to the Democrats since most of those pieces of legislation passed without any, or minimal GOP support, which was not needed by the Democratic super majority. Don't let Barack Obama play Roosevelt and blame his predecessor for his bad social progressive spending habits.

It's important for the voters to remember one thing about government debt when they step into the voting booth this November. Debt isn't created by the White House. The guy in the Oval Office can ask Congress for any spending bill he wants. But, constitutionally, the House of Representatives controls debt creation. Before the illegal ratification of the 17th Amendment the States, through the US Senate, possessed the ability to stop government spending by simply voting down the spending bills created by the House. And, to some degree, they did whenever the debt would force the States to fund the obligation. Prior to ratification of the 17th Amendment, the States controlled one third of the power in Washington. That, of course, was the reason the money barons needed to remove them from the equation of power in Washington, and why the 17th Amendment was needed by the barons of banking. The Federal Reserve Act would never have been enacted if the States controlled the US Senate on Dec. 23, 1913 when the Senate passed the legislation and then President Thomas Woodrow Wilson signed it into law that evening.. For whatever it's worth, once again, you have my two cents worth on this subject...

 

.

 

Just Say No
Copyright 2009 Jon Christian Ryter.
All rights reserved
.